On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 17:53, Stuart McCulloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/9/24 Yvan Royon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> The way I see it, an OSGi bundle tries to fit both granularities at >> the same time. >> Thus, it is up to the packager to choose one or the other, or a little >> of both, and it can be ugly. >> >> In my opinion, OSGi (or maybe just OBR and the shell service) needs a >> way to express "group-of-bundles-that-go-together-to-form-a-useful-app", >> so that developers and packagers can express both granularities. > > perhaps something like this :) > > > http://www.osgi.org/javadoc/r4/org/osgi/service/deploymentadmin/DeploymentPackage.html > > although there's still plenty of scope for further development / tooling... >
Ah, so I should have paid attention to those hundreds of pages after all :) Well, it's a little disappointing that DeploymentPackages (and p2 Installable Units, from what I gather) are not first-class OSGi citizens. What is kind of a breaker is this: "Two deployment packages are not allowed to create or manipulate the same artifact." This means in an open platform, with multiple software providers, I can't wrap a whole hypothetical application in a single DeploymentPackage if it includes standard or widely-used services. I need to carefully identify and separate some parts of the application from the no-longer-global package, if I want to play nice with others. And then use an extension such as OBR to ease the deployment of those remaining parts. That's a bit of useless complexity, and 2 layers of optional features, for something quite basic (single-click application deployment, on a deployment platform...). I sound trollish, but oh well :) -- Yvan Royon _______________________________________________ OSGi Developer Mail List osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
